Pipit bullet.... ID please....

RedRobin

Dances With Dogs
Messages
9,310
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
Pipits seem to be tricky to identify. This is one I photographed yesterday over marshland and reedbeds on the south coast near Poole. So it's likely to be either a Meadow or Rock Pipit but also possibly a Water Pipit.

Any Pipit experts here, please?

Pipit_2787vfxns.jpg


^ Canon 400mm F/5.6L on 7D Mark II. The 65pt Autofocus system worked pretty well to catch this.

Comments welcome (as long as they are constructive and not just saying I should bin it!).
 
Tis the lesser spotted wingless pipit :D

Sorry, no idea on the ID, but bloody well caught (y)
 
Sorry cant help on ID. But looks like its going home wingless from a Christmas party. nice one
 
Sorry cant help on ID. But looks like its going home wingless from a Christmas party. nice one

....LOL Not just wingless but legless from a Christmas party too! :D

As every bird photographer knows, species like this fly pretty fast and also the Pipits have an erratic and underlating flight path, so challenging for an autofocus system. However, apart from Lady Luck being at my side, the winter sun was low and I was able to lock onto the subject through the 65 pt AF sensors. Although my 7D2 is permanently set to 10fps I didn't machine gun it and just got one shot which counted. I like the turned head and highlight in the eye and this isn't an image I am inclined to bin.
 
Regarding this Pipit's ID, I emailed a local expert who runs 'Birds of Poole Harbour' which covers the area where I was shooting. His reply is....

"Hi Robin

Thanks for your photo, I love a good Pipit ID challenge.

Although your photo only shows the underside, the light is good enough to be able to show some good features. Firstly, the outer-tail feathers do show quite a strong white colouring, despite being shadowed by the inner-tail feathers. This would obviously indicate Water Pipit, but unfortunately without seeing the tail splayed you wouldn't be able to ID this bird purely on this feature as Rock Pipit outer-tail feathers can often look bright in good light. However, to me I can see clear pale supercilium (eye stripe) which tends to be more prominent in Water Pipit in winter than Rock Pipit. Its difficult to see how buff or pale the bird is in context to anything, but to me it looks pale with less diffuse streaking on the breast and flanks which is another pro Water Pipit feature. The bill looks a bit long but that could just be the angle of the birds head in the photo.

In summery, looking at all the features I'm pretty sure you've got a Water Pipit here, but wouldn't like to commit 100% without seeing some other photos, maybe from some other angles? Taking into account the habitat around Swineham at the moment, Water Pipit is a good bet and considering I saw one there about a week ago that also adds to the case.

Many thanks for sending this through, and by all means, if you get any more photos you would like help withy then please send them through.

Kind regards

Paul"


....So, indications are that it is most probably a Water Pipit. I had seen distinctive white flashes on the tail as it rose and my first thought then was a Wagtail. I don't have any other photos of it.
 
it is still a crap shot and I would still bin it.......bit like my other post, lack of humour here guys.
 
.......bit like my other post, lack of humour here guys.
And that is the problem isn't it ?
One man's joke / sarcasm, is another man's insult.
If a few RTM's come in about attitude then the the posts are removed,
to save a war.
We all know how these comment quickly end up.
We have seen it time and time again.

So with the available information, we act to de-fuse these before they actually really kick off ;)
 
withdrawn, pointless argument.
 
Last edited:
and that is why the bird forum is so sub standard than it was 18 months a go, fill your boots. All posts ,replies and crit are wearisome, inane crap. TP is the new Flickr.
I understand where you are coming from, but also the admin like a little decorum in the forum,
far too many people have RTM'd the fact that they are leaving due to the general attitude
across some of the forums.
Can you really imaging a no holds barred forum?
even OoF is (needs to be) moderated to some extent.
 
not arrsed any more Chris, no offence intended to your good self.
 
it is still a crap shot and I would still bin it.......bit like my other post, lack of humour here guys.

....If you think an image is crap then why can't you at least post why you have that opinion, fracster. Are you capable of being constructive or helpful in your criticisms and opinions?
 
Last edited:
It's not a bird on a stick but really shows the speed these birds travel at. I'm impressed at how you caught it in flight, especially in flattened out speed mode.
 
It's not a bird on a stick but really shows the speed these birds travel at. I'm impressed at how you caught it in flight, especially in flattened out speed mode.
With Byker here,OK its not a shot I would keep or print but considering the progression Robin as made this last 12 months did any one really believe he would come along with a in- flight shot of a fast bird ,now I remember the battles some guys on here had with Robin and his PP with a few heated discussions along the way ,some got him some didn't ,what I see in Robins shots now are evolution in his photography (as a hobby) now I have seen some members who have been on TP for donkeys years and have yet to evolve in their photography ,and are quite happy doing so ,I agree that when you improve your do leave yourself open for a tad more CC than you would have received in the early days ,that is the bit you have to take on the chin and accept ,not having a go here Ade but if you had put a smiley on the end of your comment I believe it would have been taken differently ,this bird section as changed this last 8 months and I believe that it as gone very Flickr LIKE and that is the way it is ,what cant be cured must be endured ,you obviously care about the Bird/wild and free section Ade and I like yourself do see some awful images (not from newbies) but long term members that believe if Uncle Bill thinks its amazing on Flickr it deserves 5 stars on TP ,anyway not using the post to have a dig , on the contrary quite the opposite.....
 
It is an unusual shot.

In my opinion CC is really good from both sides ...... it is good to give it but also to accept it as it helps to look at what we post in a different way. Sometimes you can become a little blind to your own shots.
Certain people give crit in a direct way and some more diplomatically. This is something you get used to on here over time ...... I think Flickr is not too good as the comments on there are never too constructive, this Forum however does try to help if you don't take it the wrong way and use it constructively. Obviously if someone says your image is "crap" it may not be satisfactory and if so it is worth looking at your image in a different light. Others may not be as direct and talk around it ...... OR others may think that it is poor and remain silent ........ which do you prefer ....... silence or an opinion.

The situation is that if you post it in this section you are by default asking for crit ...... I did not realise this for a few months.

I only find the shot interesting from an ID perspective ...... but I will not critise it negatively as I realise that Robin can sometimes be sensitive about negative criticism.

If someone thinks that my images are sh1t I don't really mind anymore if someone says that ...... in fact I find it useful.

BIF shots are never easy and in my experience there is little that can be planned as it is all over so quickly; I find "spray and pray" to be the best method and to hope that I get a good one ....... almost by accident or good luck
 
Last edited:
I only find the shot interesting from an ID perspective ...... but I will not critise it negatively as I realise that Robin can sometimes be sensitive about negative criticism.

If someone thinks that my images are sh1t I don't really mind anymore if someone says that ...... in fact I find it useful.

....If I am sensitive to negative comments it is only when such comments don't offer any reasoning and say something is "crap" without any further explanation at all - It's not exactly helpful or constructive criticism is it.

If I debate someone's criticism it's only when I don't happen to agree with it at the time - I may change my mind later after further consideration. Some comments I agree with and others I don't - It's not being over sensitive but is just a discussion from which more can be learnt.

I prefer an opinion rather than silence but I do not appreciate rude (which isn't the same as "direct") negative criticisms when they are unqualified. But, hey-ho, some folks lack any diplomatic skills or tact, let alone good manners. If someone really wants to go head-to-head with me I am very capable of chopping them up in little pieces and burying them (I am told), but I am also capable of admitting I was wrong about something and apologising.

In my opinion, the TP Staff should do more to police unqualified one-word criticisms which are so unconstructive and unhelpful to the recipient. As a Moderator on two internet forums I am not impressed with TP in this respect and it is no wonder that members leave or stop contributing posts due to such behaviour being allowed - I already know quite a few who agree with me and who now post very little if at all. @Cobra and Staff, please take note.

This thread (as its title states) was posted for an ID and although comments were also invited, some people have totally missed the point that ID and recording of species is a valuable component in human attempts to look after wildlife. Aren't wildlife photographers also interested in benefitting wildlife?
 
Robin, you must have got used to how people say what they want to say in the bird section by now. I, like you, was offended initially but you soon learn that is the way it is and it's just the way some want to say what they want to say.

I tend to understand what these one word criticisms mean and either agree or disagree ........ but it's just the way it is and I do not think, (well I hope), no malice is intended

It is just a (recognised) part of the Bird section and yes I do believe that we are all interested in wildlife in a much broader sense than just taking images.
 
It's back to the same old argument that's killed this section. If you (not you specifically Robin but folk in general) get an unqualified "that's a cracker of an image," "great shot," type of reply then that's greatly received but if the unqualified reply is "that's a crap image," then it's classed as rude and negative. Works both ways, or it should. Kiss @rse comments which are not justified/qualified or reasoned should be treated the same way as those classed as negative or rude but they're nor and doubt they ever will be. That said at times some folk just need to man up a bit.

For what it's worth I think the images is crap..............................................errrrrrr, just because:D;)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mex
Robin, you must have got used to how people say what they want to say in the bird section by now. I, like you, was offended initially but you soon learn that is the way it is and it's just the way some want to say what they want to say.

I tend to understand what these one word criticisms mean and either agree or disagree ........ but it's just the way it is and I do not think, (well I hope), no malice is intended

It is just a (recognised) part of the Bird section and yes I do believe that we are all interested in wildlife in a much broader sense than just taking images.
I disagree Bill, if a member post a shot regardless of whether its for ID purposes or CC ........a comment of crap shot I would bin it is disrespectful and rude and no member on this forum should have to accept that...end off
 
I disagree Bill, if a member post a shot regardless of whether its for ID purposes or CC ........a comment of crap shot I would bin it is disrespectful and rude and no member on this forum should have to accept that...end off
That comment is crap and should be binned:whistle:
 
I disagree Bill, if a member post a shot regardless of whether its for ID purposes or CC ........a comment of crap shot I would bin it is disrespectful and rude and no member on this forum should have to accept that...end off

Generally I agree and it's just not worth anyone getting "heavy" - not many people say "it should be binned" and we know who they are and by now what they mean.

But I have received "bin it" comments and they are generally 50% correct and I also appreciate the "good image" two words and the guys that post them...... in this section we all love and appreciate wildlife and we are passionate about taking images of such ..... the section is good in that it can put up with all ............ and only an individual can decide if it is "richer" for this

It is a debate that we constantly spark ....... and the pendulum will always swing ......... just don't take it to heart, you and I have seen it enough times to realise what it is.

No disrespect to anyone, its Christmas

now all you lot who have to get off to work and support the country .........I'm on my third cup of morning tea
 
It's not a bird on a stick but really shows the speed these birds travel at. I'm impressed at how you caught it in flight, especially in flattened out speed mode.

....Capturing a small bird's speed and at the same time being able to 99.9% ID the bird as a relatively uncommon Water Pipit is why I won't be binning this so-called "crap" image. I still don't know why anyone (two people in particular) think this image is "crap" - I might learn something if I knew.

If nothing else, I was pleased to achieve some success with my new Canon 7D Mark II's AF tracking system on such a tricky subject although of course Lady Luck was at my side.

I think my next thread needs to be a bird-on-a-stick :D
 
i quite like "birds on sticks" and so do birds

It is not a "crap" image, but IMHO there are things about the image that I find distracting because of maybe my preferences

1). The sky is very blue
2). The composition is somewhat boring
3). Cannot see the feet, looks un-natrural ....... but it is natural

As I said I found it useful for ID purposes but I found it strange that the "expert" felt that the beak was too long as it looks longer because of the stuff it has in it.

But it really is not worth debating Robin, IMHO it is an ordinary shot that you should keep as a "tick" until you get a better one.

on the "only ID" point - you find that with many threads on here the further you get down the list of postings the further away from the original question it is.

Just don't worry about it, it will be troublesome today as they both probably have today off work!!!!!

"the end"
 
I don't do birds, but occaisionally find myself at Slimbridge (good family day out) or accompanying a friend who's a bird spotter. I'm amazed that people can catch the small birds like kingfishers etc in flight. Was the lens/camera handheld, mounted on tripod/monopod? I think I said on Gramps bird on a stick thread that to the uninformed they are ok, probably very interesting documentary images to a bird enthusiast, but a different image such as this has wider appeal. It's interesting to see it's slimlined approach to speed. Does it flap for power then dart streamlined for a bit?
 
i quite like "birds on sticks" and so do birds

It is not a "crap" image, but IMHO there are things about the image that I find distracting because of maybe my preferences

1). The sky is very blue
2). The composition is somewhat boring
3). Cannot see the feet, looks un-natrural ....... but it is natural

As I said I found it useful for ID purposes but I found it strange that the "expert" felt that the beak was too long as it looks longer because of the stuff it has in it.

But it really is not worth debating Robin, IMHO it is an ordinary shot that you should keep as a "tick" until you get a better one.

on the "only ID" point - you find that with many threads on here the further you get down the list of postings the further away from the original question it is.

Just don't worry about it, it will be troublesome today as they both probably have today off work!!!!!

"the end"
The end
clear.png
clear.png
 
That comment is crap and should be binned:whistle:
Do you not think its time you grew up and behaved like a adult...how can these threads and posts move on and go forward when you come along with your puerile comments ,I read your comments and decide if I agree or disagree if neither I move on ,you don't need to treat the place like your own bloody playground and taking over:banghead::banghead::banghead: The end.....
 
Last edited:
i quite like "birds on sticks" and so do birds

It is not a "crap" image, but IMHO there are things about the image that I find distracting because of maybe my preferences

1). The sky is very blue
2). The composition is somewhat boring
3). Cannot see the feet, looks un-natrural ....... but it is natural

As I said I found it useful for ID purposes but I found it strange that the "expert" felt that the beak was too long as it looks longer because of the stuff it has in it.

But it really is not worth debating Robin, IMHO it is an ordinary shot that you should keep as a "tick" until you get a better one.

on the "only ID" point - you find that with many threads on here the further you get down the list of postings the further away from the original question it is.

Just don't worry about it, it will be troublesome today as they both probably have today off work!!!!!

"the end"
The end
clear.png
clear.png
 
I don't do birds, but occaisionally find myself at Slimbridge (good family day out) or accompanying a friend who's a bird spotter. I'm amazed that people can catch the small birds like kingfishers etc in flight. Was the lens/camera handheld, mounted on tripod/monopod? I think I said on Gramps bird on a stick thread that to the uninformed they are ok, probably very interesting documentary images to a bird enthusiast, but a different image such as this has wider appeal. It's interesting to see it's slimlined approach to speed. Does it flap for power then dart streamlined for a bit?

....To answer your questions:

The camera was handheld (but I had a monopod with me) - There is usually more freedom to move and follow a bird in flight when handheld.

Yes, as you say, Pipits fly in an undulating pattern maintaining height with short bursts of wingbeats and adopting an aerodynamic shape for speed inbetween, which is the moment I captured.

The naked human eye has a certain amount of difficulty seeing how streamlined a fast bird can be in flight but a photo can capture it and both educate and provide interest.

One day I hope to capture a good image of a Kingfisher in flight. Only got one perched so far. Having the challenge of trying to constantly improve one's pictures is exciting.
 
Shut up and get a sense of humour ffs. See the wee smiley at the end of the comment
It's an indication of light heartedness. The end.
 
Shut up and get a sense of humour ffs. See the wee smiley at the end of the comment
It's an indication of light heartedness. The end.

go and have a bacon sandwich ……. I really fancy one this morning now I am back in the UK for Christmas ……… I'll just go and check on the D750 thread!!
 
i quite like "birds on sticks" and so do birds

It is not a "crap" image, but IMHO there are things about the image that I find distracting because of maybe my preferences

1). The sky is very blue
2). The composition is somewhat boring
3). Cannot see the feet, looks un-natrural ....... but it is natural



....I agree that the sky is very blue but think that your composition comment is more your personal preferences. You are never going to see a Pipit's feet when they are in streamlined-mode for fast flight as in my photo. That's the point - It's totally natural, as you already recognise.

Thanks Bill, comments like this are potentially helpful and appreciated :)



 
I've got to admit, I like it . Just because it looks so strange. It may not be very good for ID purposes as explained above. But photographs do not have to show every single part of the birds anatomy.

I've been on the receiving end of some dismal, negative comments on another thread recently, including one from one of the above, and I just think - why ever do these people bother? You certainly wouldn't want to meet them in the pub (or anywhere, come to that)
 
Last edited:

....I agree that the sky is very blue but think that your composition comment is more your personal preferences. You are never going to see a Pipit's feet when they are in streamlined-mode for fast flight as in my photo. That's the point - It's totally natural, as you already recognise.

Thanks Bill, comments like this are potentially helpful and appreciated :)



Nought wrong with blue skies......they do happen occasionally.
 
It's back to the same old argument that's killed this section. If you (not you specifically Robin but folk in general) get an unqualified "that's a cracker of an image," "great shot," type of reply then that's greatly received but if the unqualified reply is "that's a crap image," then it's classed as rude and negative. Works both ways, or it should. Kiss @rse comments which are not justified/qualified or reasoned should be treated the same way as those classed as negative or rude but they're nor and doubt they ever will be. That said at times some folk just need to man up a bit.

For what it's worth I think the images is crap..............................................errrrrrr, just because:D;)

But, as has been said before, just posting "that's crap" is quite a negative response. That's fine if you don't like it but explain why, then others may find something in your comments that makes them think the next time they find temselves in a similar situation. Just saying "that's crap" serves no purpose other than to make you appear to be someone who is worth ignoring. Same as in the Art threads, we work in a subjective field, not everyone is going to like the same stuff, but at least explain why.
 
Back
Top